[Fedora-packaging] Re: Mail voting on kmdl adoption

[seth vidal]

On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 23:11 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 15:58 -0400, Jack Neely wrote:
> 
> > Again, show me how kmdl scales.  A university/enterprise environment is
> > not a 3rd party extras repository.  
> 
> I pointed out earlier in this thread that we've used a scheme similar to
> kmdl at work (speaking of thousands of systems here) rather successfully
> for several years. And like I stated previously as well, this is just
> for the record, I'm not arguing for either scheme.
> 
> It's not kmdl or kmod that scales, it's the processes for releasing
> kernel modules and the depsolver+plugin to handle them which need to
> "scale": a plugin can be smart enough to skip the kernel update if no
> corresponding kernel module for the new version can be found, or abort
> the entire update. But you'll need plugins for both schemes to catch the
> situation where somehow a new kernel slipped out without having kernel
> modules for it available, otherwise you can end up with unbootable
> system.
> 

monkey-wrench question:

  what happens if both versions of a kernel module work on the available
kernel but work with different versions of the userland tools?

-sv